[quote]Cortes wrote:
To clarify a little, I often see what I feel is overcompensation by women who appear to feel they need to “prove” that they can be everything that a man can be, and more.[/quote]
In contrast, I can probably hem pants, iron shirts, pick out bed linens and make dark chocolate truffles better than most women. Not that I’m competing.
But I would say it’s interesting that on the one hand, I see women trying to do everything a man can and more; and on the other hand, I see men intentionally avoiding things that are perceived as feminine.
And the net result is that there are less and less feminine women, and I don’t like it.
I also really don’t like that more and more women have adopted masculine attitudes in the way they compartmentalize emotions and avoid empathy. I’ve seen this a lot, especially among those who fashion themselves as “independent” and “career driven”.
Similarly, I’ve also heard the frustrations from some girls where they try to live up to some “feminist” ideal, but at the same time, they really want to just be pretty, dress up and be taken care of. Those who have trouble deciding whether to thank a guy for opening a door for them, or to call him a misogynist pig.
[quote]Cortes wrote:
To clarify a little, I often see what I feel is overcompensation by women who appear to feel they need to “prove” that they can be everything that a man can be, and more.[/quote]
In contrast, I can probably hem pants, iron shirts, pick out bed linens and make dark chocolate truffles better than most women. Not that I’m competing.
But I would say it’s interesting that on the one hand, I see women trying to do everything a man can and more; and on the other hand, I see men intentionally avoiding things that are perceived as feminine.
And the net result is that there are less and less feminine women, and I don’t like it.
I also really don’t like that more and more women have adopted masculine attitudes in the way they compartmentalize emotions and avoid empathy. I’ve seen this a lot, especially among those who fashion themselves as “independent”. In fact, I’ve also heard the frustrations from some girls where they try to live up to some “feminist” ideal, but at the same time, they really want to just be pretty, dress up and be taken care of. Those who have trouble deciding whether to thank a guy for opening a door for them, or to call him a misogynist pig.[/quote]
Absolutely, fervently agree with this.
I feel the contrast all the more poignantly in that spent the first 26 years of my life in the US before moving here 10 years ago. This country is still very conservative, and while women’s rights do have a way to go before catching up to those of women in the US, social roles are much more balanced.
[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
I don’t know about the pendulum swinging too far, though I acknowledge that in many cases men are now disadvantaged.[/quote]
Please explain this sentence to me.[/quote]
I’m saying that I realize there are abuses, as related anecdotally on these boards, but that I’m not sure the legal balance is out of whack. That’s not to say it’s fine, it’s saying I don’t know. Much of the evidence I see linked here that supports generalized outrage is false or skewed.
[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
I don’t know about the pendulum swinging too far, though I acknowledge that in many cases men are now disadvantaged.[/quote]
Please explain this sentence to me.[/quote]
I’m saying that I realize there are abuses, as related anecdotally on these boards, but that I’m not sure the legal balance is out of whack. That’s not to say it’s fine, it’s saying I don’t know. Much of the evidence I see linked here that supports generalized outrage is false or skewed. [/quote]
Okay, just couldn’t make heads or tails out of a statement that doubted the pendulum swinging too far and then stating that there was disadvantage for one party.
I think part of the problem is that people are all too willing to legislate on “behalf” of women. In and of itself, this is not a problem (usually). The problem starts when people are unwilling to extend that courtesy to men (i.e. mandatory paternity testing, abolition of alimony in no-fault divorces, primary custody of children in no fault divorces not going to the initiating party).
But I have to admit, it looks like there IS an element of truth to the plainness thing… at least in terms of those who made a difference.
Although, I don’t think that’s much different than the success that unattractive unmarried men have had in anything else. Without the pursuit of sex or maintenance of a relationship to clutter up daily life, there’s a lot of free time and redirected sexual energy to put into other pursuits.[/quote]
I agree, though I would point out that plainness was probably the rule rather than the exception back then, given the lack of appearance-enhancing products.
Still, you’re right in that people with no mate and no kids have more time and energy for causes. I would think that the married women who undertook this fight were probably unhappy at home as well, which would reinforce other stereotypes of the time. [/quote]
The ones who were married would probably have been rather strongly discouraged by their husbands from engaging in such “frivolity.”
NOT saying they would have beat their wives, although some of them would have. But that society at that time DID actively discourage the notion that women should have a say in how the world is run. [/quote]
Yes, I’m imagining that the women out there campaigning probably had somewhat weak husbands, given that it would have been an embarrassment to them. Though maybe I underestimate them. Maybe some of them really believed in equal rights, for their unmarried daughters or sisters or whatever.
I don’t know about the pendulum swinging too far, though I acknowledge that in many cases men are now disadvantaged. I do agree that men and women are different and that’s good. I’m happy being a girl and I like boys who act like boys. But I am a feminine woman, both in the physical sense and personality-wise, who does well with both men and women. Life is less kind to women who are too big or too ugly or too masculine. They don’t live like I do. It’s good that there are honorable options for them now, and for the feminine women who somehow become “tarnished” by a man or men they shouldn’t have trusted or submitted to, but did, as is some women’s nature.
[/quote]
To clarify a little, I often see what I feel is overcompensation by women who appear to feel they need to “prove” that they can be everything that a man can be, and more. I see example after example of this, mostly in the media, but a lot on this site, too. And while it’s a great thing that women are more and more able to enjoy the rights they have been unfairly deprived of throughout basically all of human history, all too often any comparison with men in which women are viewed as not measuring up to some standard is misinterpreted as disenfranchisement. I know that my wife is a FAR better nurturer and has miles more patience than I do when one of our sons is whining or crying. By the same token, there are times when the boys NEED to be disciplined, or when one of us needs to take an aggressive leadership role in our business that requires giving orders or reprimanding an employee. She absolutely despises being put in the position to do any of these. And I’m just no good when the kids are acting up out of tiredness or frustration.
In general, there are things that women are better at, and things that men are better at, and families and societies whose members basically adhere to these roles are typically happier and more satisfied with their lives. Hell, just the fact that these arguments tend to be so evenly divided down gender lines should be a good indicator that there is something to the idea. I had a really good discussion about this with TBG back when SAMA and he were still around. I think you participated in it. The one about femininity and masculinity. [/quote]
You do know what you typed here is what feminists/equal rights people hate?
Rather than saying a woman cannot do that, they merely state that women can do that and should be given that right.
The same goes for the party girl. I have a lot of FB feeds from these girls I know and they have this thing in their head that they can and should party as hard as the guys, if not harder but don’t give a care in the world to the consequences.
Example 1
I had a job in a cinema where there were 4 female bosses above me, they were absolutely terrible and what compounded the problem was the number of female employee’s at the store where I worked. 20/25 females to 4 men.
The girls were let off home early, given easy tasks and were allowed to bullshit each boss because they were friends. They got away with a lot of shit.
Me and my friend would stock up throughout the day, get things ready for the busy walk-ins and what happens? The girls who did no preparation just took the stock we had over to their area.
Now this might sound like petty whining but compound this over 4 or more years with a lack of teamwork, lack of discipline from above regarding these matters AND the sheer audacity of the women here to take the piss and claim “teehee I’m a girl I dont have to do it”, you would be hard pressed to find a man that didn’t react badly to this.
Female bosses are utter, utter shit. Not only do they hold grudges over long periods of time, they shit talk you to everyone else.
One of these women even got the job for sucking off a manager at another cinema. Classy much? WOmens rights much?
I dont think it is a matter of rights its merely become a matter of “I am a woman, so get out of my way”.
Is it any wonder why men today are reacting against women in a hostile manner?
But I have to admit, it looks like there IS an element of truth to the plainness thing… at least in terms of those who made a difference.
Although, I don’t think that’s much different than the success that unattractive unmarried men have had in anything else. Without the pursuit of sex or maintenance of a relationship to clutter up daily life, there’s a lot of free time and redirected sexual energy to put into other pursuits.[/quote]
I agree, though I would point out that plainness was probably the rule rather than the exception back then, given the lack of appearance-enhancing products.
Still, you’re right in that people with no mate and no kids have more time and energy for causes. I would think that the married women who undertook this fight were probably unhappy at home as well, which would reinforce other stereotypes of the time. [/quote]
The ones who were married would probably have been rather strongly discouraged by their husbands from engaging in such “frivolity.”
NOT saying they would have beat their wives, although some of them would have. But that society at that time DID actively discourage the notion that women should have a say in how the world is run. [/quote]
Yes, I’m imagining that the women out there campaigning probably had somewhat weak husbands, given that it would have been an embarrassment to them. Though maybe I underestimate them. Maybe some of them really believed in equal rights, for their unmarried daughters or sisters or whatever.
I don’t know about the pendulum swinging too far, though I acknowledge that in many cases men are now disadvantaged. I do agree that men and women are different and that’s good. I’m happy being a girl and I like boys who act like boys. But I am a feminine woman, both in the physical sense and personality-wise, who does well with both men and women. Life is less kind to women who are too big or too ugly or too masculine. They don’t live like I do. It’s good that there are honorable options for them now, and for the feminine women who somehow become “tarnished” by a man or men they shouldn’t have trusted or submitted to, but did, as is some women’s nature.
[/quote]
To clarify a little, I often see what I feel is overcompensation by women who appear to feel they need to “prove” that they can be everything that a man can be, and more. I see example after example of this, mostly in the media, but a lot on this site, too. And while it’s a great thing that women are more and more able to enjoy the rights they have been unfairly deprived of throughout basically all of human history, all too often any comparison with men in which women are viewed as not measuring up to some standard is misinterpreted as disenfranchisement. I know that my wife is a FAR better nurturer and has miles more patience than I do when one of our sons is whining or crying. By the same token, there are times when the boys NEED to be disciplined, or when one of us needs to take an aggressive leadership role in our business that requires giving orders or reprimanding an employee. She absolutely despises being put in the position to do any of these. And I’m just no good when the kids are acting up out of tiredness or frustration.
In general, there are things that women are better at, and things that men are better at, and families and societies whose members basically adhere to these roles are typically happier and more satisfied with their lives. Hell, just the fact that these arguments tend to be so evenly divided down gender lines should be a good indicator that there is something to the idea. I had a really good discussion about this with TBG back when SAMA and he were still around. I think you participated in it. The one about femininity and masculinity. [/quote]
You do know what you typed here is what feminists/equal rights people hate?
Rather than saying a woman cannot do that, they merely state that women can do that and should be given that right.
[/quote]
Not really sure what you mean here. Can you explain a bit more? I have zero problem with everything below this sentence.
[quote]
The same goes for the party girl. I have a lot of FB feeds from these girls I know and they have this thing in their head that they can and should party as hard as the guys, if not harder but don’t give a care in the world to the consequences.
Example 1
I had a job in a cinema where there were 4 female bosses above me, they were absolutely terrible and what compounded the problem was the number of female employee’s at the store where I worked. 20/25 females to 4 men.
The girls were let off home early, given easy tasks and were allowed to bullshit each boss because they were friends. They got away with a lot of shit.
Me and my friend would stock up throughout the day, get things ready for the busy walk-ins and what happens? The girls who did no preparation just took the stock we had over to their area.
Now this might sound like petty whining but compound this over 4 or more years with a lack of teamwork, lack of discipline from above regarding these matters AND the sheer audacity of the women here to take the piss and claim “teehee I’m a girl I dont have to do it”, you would be hard pressed to find a man that didn’t react badly to this.
Female bosses are utter, utter shit. Not only do they hold grudges over long periods of time, they shit talk you to everyone else.
One of these women even got the job for sucking off a manager at another cinema. Classy much? WOmens rights much?
I dont think it is a matter of rights its merely become a matter of “I am a woman, so get out of my way”.
Is it any wonder why men today are reacting against women in a hostile manner?[/quote]
But I have to admit, it looks like there IS an element of truth to the plainness thing… at least in terms of those who made a difference.
Although, I don’t think that’s much different than the success that unattractive unmarried men have had in anything else. Without the pursuit of sex or maintenance of a relationship to clutter up daily life, there’s a lot of free time and redirected sexual energy to put into other pursuits.[/quote]
I agree, though I would point out that plainness was probably the rule rather than the exception back then, given the lack of appearance-enhancing products.
Still, you’re right in that people with no mate and no kids have more time and energy for causes. I would think that the married women who undertook this fight were probably unhappy at home as well, which would reinforce other stereotypes of the time. [/quote]
The ones who were married would probably have been rather strongly discouraged by their husbands from engaging in such “frivolity.”
NOT saying they would have beat their wives, although some of them would have. But that society at that time DID actively discourage the notion that women should have a say in how the world is run. [/quote]
Yes, I’m imagining that the women out there campaigning probably had somewhat weak husbands, given that it would have been an embarrassment to them. Though maybe I underestimate them. Maybe some of them really believed in equal rights, for their unmarried daughters or sisters or whatever.
I don’t know about the pendulum swinging too far, though I acknowledge that in many cases men are now disadvantaged. I do agree that men and women are different and that’s good. I’m happy being a girl and I like boys who act like boys. But I am a feminine woman, both in the physical sense and personality-wise, who does well with both men and women. Life is less kind to women who are too big or too ugly or too masculine. They don’t live like I do. It’s good that there are honorable options for them now, and for the feminine women who somehow become “tarnished” by a man or men they shouldn’t have trusted or submitted to, but did, as is some women’s nature.
[/quote]
To clarify a little, I often see what I feel is overcompensation by women who appear to feel they need to “prove” that they can be everything that a man can be, and more. I see example after example of this, mostly in the media, but a lot on this site, too. And while it’s a great thing that women are more and more able to enjoy the rights they have been unfairly deprived of throughout basically all of human history, all too often any comparison with men in which women are viewed as not measuring up to some standard is misinterpreted as disenfranchisement. I know that my wife is a FAR better nurturer and has miles more patience than I do when one of our sons is whining or crying. By the same token, there are times when the boys NEED to be disciplined, or when one of us needs to take an aggressive leadership role in our business that requires giving orders or reprimanding an employee. She absolutely despises being put in the position to do any of these. And I’m just no good when the kids are acting up out of tiredness or frustration.
In general, there are things that women are better at, and things that men are better at, and families and societies whose members basically adhere to these roles are typically happier and more satisfied with their lives. Hell, just the fact that these arguments tend to be so evenly divided down gender lines should be a good indicator that there is something to the idea. I had a really good discussion about this with TBG back when SAMA and he were still around. I think you participated in it. The one about femininity and masculinity. [/quote]
You do know what you typed here is what feminists/equal rights people hate?
Rather than saying a woman cannot do that, they merely state that women can do that and should be given that right.
The same goes for the party girl. I have a lot of FB feeds from these girls I know and they have this thing in their head that they can and should party as hard as the guys, if not harder but don’t give a care in the world to the consequences.
Example 1
I had a job in a cinema where there were 4 female bosses above me, they were absolutely terrible and what compounded the problem was the number of female employee’s at the store where I worked. 20/25 females to 4 men.
The girls were let off home early, given easy tasks and were allowed to bullshit each boss because they were friends. They got away with a lot of shit.
Me and my friend would stock up throughout the day, get things ready for the busy walk-ins and what happens? The girls who did no preparation just took the stock we had over to their area.
Now this might sound like petty whining but compound this over 4 or more years with a lack of teamwork, lack of discipline from above regarding these matters AND the sheer audacity of the women here to take the piss and claim “teehee I’m a girl I dont have to do it”, you would be hard pressed to find a man that didn’t react badly to this.
Female bosses are utter, utter shit. Not only do they hold grudges over long periods of time, they shit talk you to everyone else.
One of these women even got the job for sucking off a manager at another cinema. Classy much? WOmens rights much?
I dont think it is a matter of rights its merely become a matter of “I am a woman, so get out of my way”.
Is it any wonder why men today are reacting against women in a hostile manner?[/quote]
Meh, most bosses are shit to one degree or another, regardless of gender. Most employees too for that matter. This is because most people are petty, childish, egocentric and ineffective. The suckage may tend to take a different shape for women than it does for men, but the overall level of suck is about the same. There are numerous historical examples of effective female leadership, but they are rare as are the examples of effective male leadership when expressed as a relative percentage of leaders.
I don’t care much for the current shape of popular “feminism” either, but don’t use it as an excuse to justify violence toward women. I actually tend to believe that the ugliness of we are seeing in women has a s much to do with men’s widespread failure to hold up our end of the masculine/feminine deal as it does with “women’s rights”. I suppose many will think that’s chauvinistic of me, but there it is.
But I have to admit, it looks like there IS an element of truth to the plainness thing… at least in terms of those who made a difference.
Although, I don’t think that’s much different than the success that unattractive unmarried men have had in anything else. Without the pursuit of sex or maintenance of a relationship to clutter up daily life, there’s a lot of free time and redirected sexual energy to put into other pursuits.[/quote]
I agree, though I would point out that plainness was probably the rule rather than the exception back then, given the lack of appearance-enhancing products.
Still, you’re right in that people with no mate and no kids have more time and energy for causes. I would think that the married women who undertook this fight were probably unhappy at home as well, which would reinforce other stereotypes of the time. [/quote]
The ones who were married would probably have been rather strongly discouraged by their husbands from engaging in such “frivolity.”
NOT saying they would have beat their wives, although some of them would have. But that society at that time DID actively discourage the notion that women should have a say in how the world is run. [/quote]
Yes, I’m imagining that the women out there campaigning probably had somewhat weak husbands, given that it would have been an embarrassment to them. Though maybe I underestimate them. Maybe some of them really believed in equal rights, for their unmarried daughters or sisters or whatever.
I don’t know about the pendulum swinging too far, though I acknowledge that in many cases men are now disadvantaged. I do agree that men and women are different and that’s good. I’m happy being a girl and I like boys who act like boys. But I am a feminine woman, both in the physical sense and personality-wise, who does well with both men and women. Life is less kind to women who are too big or too ugly or too masculine. They don’t live like I do. It’s good that there are honorable options for them now, and for the feminine women who somehow become “tarnished” by a man or men they shouldn’t have trusted or submitted to, but did, as is some women’s nature.
[/quote]
To clarify a little, I often see what I feel is overcompensation by women who appear to feel they need to “prove” that they can be everything that a man can be, and more. I see example after example of this, mostly in the media, but a lot on this site, too. And while it’s a great thing that women are more and more able to enjoy the rights they have been unfairly deprived of throughout basically all of human history, all too often any comparison with men in which women are viewed as not measuring up to some standard is misinterpreted as disenfranchisement. I know that my wife is a FAR better nurturer and has miles more patience than I do when one of our sons is whining or crying. By the same token, there are times when the boys NEED to be disciplined, or when one of us needs to take an aggressive leadership role in our business that requires giving orders or reprimanding an employee. She absolutely despises being put in the position to do any of these. And I’m just no good when the kids are acting up out of tiredness or frustration.
In general, there are things that women are better at, and things that men are better at, and families and societies whose members basically adhere to these roles are typically happier and more satisfied with their lives. Hell, just the fact that these arguments tend to be so evenly divided down gender lines should be a good indicator that there is something to the idea. I had a really good discussion about this with TBG back when SAMA and he were still around. I think you participated in it. The one about femininity and masculinity. [/quote]
You do know what you typed here is what feminists/equal rights people hate?
Rather than saying a woman cannot do that, they merely state that women can do that and should be given that right.
[/quote]
Not really sure what you mean here. Can you explain a bit more? I have zero problem with everything below this sentence.
[/quote]
When you say to a woman; “well women are better at some things than men and men are better than women at certain things” they tend to hang onto the last part with a vice grip.
The usual response is “well what can a man do that we cant do just as well?”.
The mere mention of physical prowess will be met with scorn, even if you’re doing it in a lighthearted manner and believe me, I did this in a lighthearted manner but they persisted.
It ended up with them demanding it be a fair playing field on how a woman is not as good as a man and I just got fed up of their serious attitude towards a notsureifsrs remark so I used history.
I shot off many examples where men were the leaders and women were good at keeping the men sane.
So the question you get faced with is basically; “how is a man better at leading a corporation, military unit, group session than a woman?”
There is no reasonable way to win because they have it in their heads that they can have a good career, be a team leader and have a family at the same time.
But I have to admit, it looks like there IS an element of truth to the plainness thing… at least in terms of those who made a difference.
Although, I don’t think that’s much different than the success that unattractive unmarried men have had in anything else. Without the pursuit of sex or maintenance of a relationship to clutter up daily life, there’s a lot of free time and redirected sexual energy to put into other pursuits.[/quote]
I agree, though I would point out that plainness was probably the rule rather than the exception back then, given the lack of appearance-enhancing products.
Still, you’re right in that people with no mate and no kids have more time and energy for causes. I would think that the married women who undertook this fight were probably unhappy at home as well, which would reinforce other stereotypes of the time. [/quote]
The ones who were married would probably have been rather strongly discouraged by their husbands from engaging in such “frivolity.”
NOT saying they would have beat their wives, although some of them would have. But that society at that time DID actively discourage the notion that women should have a say in how the world is run. [/quote]
Yes, I’m imagining that the women out there campaigning probably had somewhat weak husbands, given that it would have been an embarrassment to them. Though maybe I underestimate them. Maybe some of them really believed in equal rights, for their unmarried daughters or sisters or whatever.
I don’t know about the pendulum swinging too far, though I acknowledge that in many cases men are now disadvantaged. I do agree that men and women are different and that’s good. I’m happy being a girl and I like boys who act like boys. But I am a feminine woman, both in the physical sense and personality-wise, who does well with both men and women. Life is less kind to women who are too big or too ugly or too masculine. They don’t live like I do. It’s good that there are honorable options for them now, and for the feminine women who somehow become “tarnished” by a man or men they shouldn’t have trusted or submitted to, but did, as is some women’s nature.
[/quote]
To clarify a little, I often see what I feel is overcompensation by women who appear to feel they need to “prove” that they can be everything that a man can be, and more. I see example after example of this, mostly in the media, but a lot on this site, too. And while it’s a great thing that women are more and more able to enjoy the rights they have been unfairly deprived of throughout basically all of human history, all too often any comparison with men in which women are viewed as not measuring up to some standard is misinterpreted as disenfranchisement. I know that my wife is a FAR better nurturer and has miles more patience than I do when one of our sons is whining or crying. By the same token, there are times when the boys NEED to be disciplined, or when one of us needs to take an aggressive leadership role in our business that requires giving orders or reprimanding an employee. She absolutely despises being put in the position to do any of these. And I’m just no good when the kids are acting up out of tiredness or frustration.
In general, there are things that women are better at, and things that men are better at, and families and societies whose members basically adhere to these roles are typically happier and more satisfied with their lives. Hell, just the fact that these arguments tend to be so evenly divided down gender lines should be a good indicator that there is something to the idea. I had a really good discussion about this with TBG back when SAMA and he were still around. I think you participated in it. The one about femininity and masculinity. [/quote]
You do know what you typed here is what feminists/equal rights people hate?
Rather than saying a woman cannot do that, they merely state that women can do that and should be given that right.
The same goes for the party girl. I have a lot of FB feeds from these girls I know and they have this thing in their head that they can and should party as hard as the guys, if not harder but don’t give a care in the world to the consequences.
Example 1
I had a job in a cinema where there were 4 female bosses above me, they were absolutely terrible and what compounded the problem was the number of female employee’s at the store where I worked. 20/25 females to 4 men.
The girls were let off home early, given easy tasks and were allowed to bullshit each boss because they were friends. They got away with a lot of shit.
Me and my friend would stock up throughout the day, get things ready for the busy walk-ins and what happens? The girls who did no preparation just took the stock we had over to their area.
Now this might sound like petty whining but compound this over 4 or more years with a lack of teamwork, lack of discipline from above regarding these matters AND the sheer audacity of the women here to take the piss and claim “teehee I’m a girl I dont have to do it”, you would be hard pressed to find a man that didn’t react badly to this.
Female bosses are utter, utter shit. Not only do they hold grudges over long periods of time, they shit talk you to everyone else.
One of these women even got the job for sucking off a manager at another cinema. Classy much? WOmens rights much?
I dont think it is a matter of rights its merely become a matter of “I am a woman, so get out of my way”.
Is it any wonder why men today are reacting against women in a hostile manner?[/quote]
Meh, most bosses are shit to one degree or another, regardless of gender. Most employees too for that matter. This is because most people are petty, childish, egocentric and ineffective. The suckage may tend to take a different shape for women than it does for men, but the overall level of suck is about the same. There are numerous historical examples of effective female leadership, but they are rare as are the examples of effective male leadership when expressed as a relative percentage of leaders.
I don’t care much for the current shape of popular “feminism” either, but don’t use it as an excuse to justify violence toward women. I actually tend to believe that the ugliness of we are seeing in women has a s much to do with men’s widespread failure to hold up our end of the masculine/feminine deal as it does with “women’s rights”. I suppose many will think that’s chauvinistic of me, but there it is.[/quote]
I have had 3 shit male managers in my time at the job and more than 19 different female bosses who were terrible. Having a good male boss allows me as a man to have a chat on their level, have a laugh at stuff men do and get shit done. They help and understand men who work underneath them.
Sure a male boss can piss you off and I have been lucky to avoid them except 1 who was just a twat and a total shit stirrer.
I found that when a woman boss doesn’t like you they do a hell of a lot of shit talking behind your back and will never take into account your own problems or requests.
ALso, I did not advocate violence because women are pushing boundaries, I don’t need to physically hit women in order to get my point across. I merely ignore them.
I cannot say the same for an increasing number of men though. A girl pisses some guy off and the usual response is to tell her where to go. But now you wouldn’t find it rare at all to find a woman having her face punched in by a man because of what she did.
I find it part of a wider problem where the undermining of men has led to this.
But I have to admit, it looks like there IS an element of truth to the plainness thing… at least in terms of those who made a difference.
Although, I don’t think that’s much different than the success that unattractive unmarried men have had in anything else. Without the pursuit of sex or maintenance of a relationship to clutter up daily life, there’s a lot of free time and redirected sexual energy to put into other pursuits.[/quote]
I agree, though I would point out that plainness was probably the rule rather than the exception back then, given the lack of appearance-enhancing products.
Still, you’re right in that people with no mate and no kids have more time and energy for causes. I would think that the married women who undertook this fight were probably unhappy at home as well, which would reinforce other stereotypes of the time. [/quote]
The ones who were married would probably have been rather strongly discouraged by their husbands from engaging in such “frivolity.”
NOT saying they would have beat their wives, although some of them would have. But that society at that time DID actively discourage the notion that women should have a say in how the world is run. [/quote]
Yes, I’m imagining that the women out there campaigning probably had somewhat weak husbands, given that it would have been an embarrassment to them. Though maybe I underestimate them. Maybe some of them really believed in equal rights, for their unmarried daughters or sisters or whatever.
I don’t know about the pendulum swinging too far, though I acknowledge that in many cases men are now disadvantaged. I do agree that men and women are different and that’s good. I’m happy being a girl and I like boys who act like boys. But I am a feminine woman, both in the physical sense and personality-wise, who does well with both men and women. Life is less kind to women who are too big or too ugly or too masculine. They don’t live like I do. It’s good that there are honorable options for them now, and for the feminine women who somehow become “tarnished” by a man or men they shouldn’t have trusted or submitted to, but did, as is some women’s nature.
[/quote]
To clarify a little, I often see what I feel is overcompensation by women who appear to feel they need to “prove” that they can be everything that a man can be, and more. I see example after example of this, mostly in the media, but a lot on this site, too. And while it’s a great thing that women are more and more able to enjoy the rights they have been unfairly deprived of throughout basically all of human history, all too often any comparison with men in which women are viewed as not measuring up to some standard is misinterpreted as disenfranchisement. I know that my wife is a FAR better nurturer and has miles more patience than I do when one of our sons is whining or crying. By the same token, there are times when the boys NEED to be disciplined, or when one of us needs to take an aggressive leadership role in our business that requires giving orders or reprimanding an employee. She absolutely despises being put in the position to do any of these. And I’m just no good when the kids are acting up out of tiredness or frustration.
In general, there are things that women are better at, and things that men are better at, and families and societies whose members basically adhere to these roles are typically happier and more satisfied with their lives. Hell, just the fact that these arguments tend to be so evenly divided down gender lines should be a good indicator that there is something to the idea. I had a really good discussion about this with TBG back when SAMA and he were still around. I think you participated in it. The one about femininity and masculinity. [/quote]
You do know what you typed here is what feminists/equal rights people hate?
Rather than saying a woman cannot do that, they merely state that women can do that and should be given that right.
The same goes for the party girl. I have a lot of FB feeds from these girls I know and they have this thing in their head that they can and should party as hard as the guys, if not harder but don’t give a care in the world to the consequences.
Example 1
I had a job in a cinema where there were 4 female bosses above me, they were absolutely terrible and what compounded the problem was the number of female employee’s at the store where I worked. 20/25 females to 4 men.
The girls were let off home early, given easy tasks and were allowed to bullshit each boss because they were friends. They got away with a lot of shit.
Me and my friend would stock up throughout the day, get things ready for the busy walk-ins and what happens? The girls who did no preparation just took the stock we had over to their area.
Now this might sound like petty whining but compound this over 4 or more years with a lack of teamwork, lack of discipline from above regarding these matters AND the sheer audacity of the women here to take the piss and claim “teehee I’m a girl I dont have to do it”, you would be hard pressed to find a man that didn’t react badly to this.
Female bosses are utter, utter shit. Not only do they hold grudges over long periods of time, they shit talk you to everyone else.
One of these women even got the job for sucking off a manager at another cinema. Classy much? WOmens rights much?
I dont think it is a matter of rights its merely become a matter of “I am a woman, so get out of my way”.
Is it any wonder why men today are reacting against women in a hostile manner?[/quote]
Meh, most bosses are shit to one degree or another, regardless of gender. Most employees too for that matter. This is because most people are petty, childish, egocentric and ineffective. The suckage may tend to take a different shape for women than it does for men, but the overall level of suck is about the same. There are numerous historical examples of effective female leadership, but they are rare as are the examples of effective male leadership when expressed as a relative percentage of leaders.
I don’t care much for the current shape of popular “feminism” either, but don’t use it as an excuse to justify violence toward women. I actually tend to believe that the ugliness of we are seeing in women has a s much to do with men’s widespread failure to hold up our end of the masculine/feminine deal as it does with “women’s rights”. I suppose many will think that’s chauvinistic of me, but there it is.[/quote]
I have had 3 shit male managers in my time at the job and more than 19 different female bosses who were terrible. Having a good male boss allows me as a man to have a chat on their level, have a laugh at stuff men do and get shit done. They help and understand men who work underneath them.[/quote]
Wow, that’s a lot of different bosses, how old are you?
Is it possible that your apparent generalized anger toward women has in some way possibly contributed to your consistently poor relationships with your female bosses?
Just sayin’…
I’ve had 8 or 9 bosses total in 20+ years of working, 4 of them were females. IMO, one was terrible in the ways you describe, one was fairly adequate, one was decent two were ineffective but basically harmless. The guys stack up about the same, with the exception that one of them was (is) quite good. But, hey, everyone’s experience is different.
When you say to a woman; “well women are better at some things than men and men are better than women at certain things” they tend to hang onto the last part with a vice grip.
The usual response is “well what can a man do that we cant do just as well?”.
The mere mention of physical prowess will be met with scorn, even if you’re doing it in a lighthearted manner and believe me, I did this in a lighthearted manner but they persisted.
It ended up with them demanding it be a fair playing field on how a woman is not as good as a man and I just got fed up of their serious attitude towards a notsureifsrs remark so I used history.
I shot off many examples where men were the leaders and women were good at keeping the men sane.
So the question you get faced with is basically; “how is a man better at leading a corporation, military unit, group session than a woman?”
There is no reasonable way to win because they have it in their heads that they can have a good career, be a team leader and have a family at the same time.
[/quote]
Gotcha. Understood, and this is pretty much exactly what I meant by my statement that the pendulum had swung too far in the other direction.